THE SUPREME COURT MADE AN INTERESTING RULING IN
REGARD TO SEX OFFENDERS IN NORTH
CAROLINA.
NORTH CAROLINA IS A STATE THAT HAS A CERTAIN LAW ON
THE BOOKS PERTAINING TO THE SOCIAL MEDIA USE OF REGISTERED
SEX OFFENDERS.
IF YOU ARE A REGISTERED SEX OFFENDER AND HAVE
DONE CERTAIN THINGS THAT HAS
MADE YOU ONE, YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO USE SOCIAL MEDIA.
THE
THOUGHT PROCESS BEHIND THAT IS YOU COULD POTENTIALLY USE IT TO
PRAY ON UNDERAGE CHILDREN.
IN THIS CASE THE SUPREME COURT
STRUCK DOWN NORTH CAROLINA'S LAW
MONDAY.
THE JUSTICES EVEN RULED UNANIMOUSLY IN FAVOR OF NORTH
CAROLINA'S RESIDENT.
THAT IS THE PERSON WHO HAS BEEN REGISTERED
AS A SEX OFFENDER.
HE WAS CONVICTED AND HAD TO REGISTER.
HE HAD USED A FAMILY MEMBER'S FACEBOOK PAGE TO BRAG ABOUT THE
FACT THAT HE WAS LET GO FROM A TRAFFIC CITATION.
THERE WERE
COPS INVESTIGATING SOCIAL MEDIA AND THEY CAME ACROSS HIS POST.
THAT WAS CONSIDERED VIOLATING HIS PROBATION.
I'M CURIOUS WHAT
YOU GUYS THINK.
DO YOU THINK REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS SHOULD
BE ALLOWED TO USE SOCIAL MEDIA.
I AM CURIOUS TO HEAR WHAT PUBLIC OPINION IS ALL ABOUT.
>> THE SEX OFFENDER TIGHT HOLE IS INTERESTING.
THE DEGREE OF
SEXUAL OFFENSE ñ THERE IS OBVIOUSLY A WIDE BREATH ñ THERE
HAS TO BE A THRESHOLD OF SEXUAL OFFENSE IT WOULD SEEM TO ME,
THAT DOES BAR YOU FROM USING
SOCIAL MEDIA.
SINCE IT IS THE MEANS BY WHICH PEOPLE REACH OUT
TO UNDER AGE GIRLS, BUT IT CAN BE BOTH SEXES.
I'M TROUBLED BY
THIS BECAUSE ON ONE HAND I THINK YOU SHOULD HAVE ACCESS ñ ON THE
OTHER HAND ON SOME LEVEL THERE SHOULD BE A THRESHOLD OF SEXUAL
OFFENSE WHERE YOU ARE DISQUALIFIED FROM USE OF THESE
MEDIUMS.
>> LET ME GIVE YOU THE ARGUMENT BY THE SUPREME COURT WHICH RULED
UNANIMOUSLY IN FAVOR OF ALLOWING REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS TO USE
SOCIAL.
I THINK THAT IS A GOOD
POINT.
I HAVE A LOT OF PROBLEMS
WITH THE WAY SEX OFFENDERS ARE TREATED BY OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM.
TO PRAY ON UNDERAGE KIDS IS
DISGUSTING.
HOWEVER, THERE ARE STATES THAT CONSIDER PEOPLE WHO
URINATE IN PUBLIC SEX OFFENDERS.
THERE IS A WEIRD BROAD
DEFINITION OF WHAT IT MEANS.
SO DO WE DEMONIZE THESE PEOPLE FOR
THE REST OF THEIR LIVES?
IT ABSOLUTELY DOES VIOLATE THEIR
FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS.
THEY ARE ALREADY BARRED FROM MEETING WITH
MINORS.
IF THEY TAKE THAT EXTRA STEP OF MEETING WITH MINORS WHEN
THEY ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO, THEY
ARE IN TROUBLE.
BUT IF THEY ARE SIMPLY ON SOCIAL MEDIA, I DON'T
SEE THAT AS NECESSARY.
>> I AM TORN AS WELL BECAUSE ñ KIDS ARE SO ACTIVE ON SOCIAL
MEDIA TODAY.
THEY CAN LOOK TO PREY ON YOUNG KIDS ONLINE.
IF
THEY ARE BARRED FROM A PLAYGROUND OR SCHOOL THAN THEY
SHOULD BE ALLOWED IN AN AREA WHERE THEY ARE PREYED ON.
AT THE
SAME TIME IF A SEXUAL PREDATOR
WANTS TO GO ON PREY ON KIDS ñ COULD YOU NOT TRACK THEM AND
THEREFORE TRY TO FIND
PREVENTATIVE WAYS TO STOP THEM?
IF THEY ARE BANNED FROM SOCIAL
MEDIA, THEY WILL TRY TO GO FIND OTHER MEANS TO DO IT.
BUT IT IS
SUCH A COMPLEX ISSUE BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO THINK WHAT IS THE WAY
YOU CAN PREVENT SOMETHING SO
HORRENDOUS FROM HAPPENING AGAIN.
>> I THINK IT IS A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS.
I THINK IF SOMEONE IS
CAUGHT UTILIZING SOCIAL MEDIA TO FURTHER VICTIMIZE OR PREY ON
KIDS THAN OBVIOUSLY THAT PERSON SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO USE
SOCIAL MEDIA.
THAT IN THIS CASE THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF THAT.
HE
SIMPLY USE SOCIAL MEDIA TO BRAG ABOUT HOW HE BEAT A TRAFFIC
TICKET.
>>THERE HAS TO BE A THRESHOLD.
ONCE YOU REACH A
CERTAIN THRESHOLD AND CERTAIN
RESTRICTIONS WOULD SEEM WISE TO BE IMPOSED.
BUT IF YOU HAVEN'T
REACHED THAT THRESHOLD-